The are many examples of Morton’s partisanship, but the most genuinely remarkable may be one of his shortest and the most recent, which purports to inform readers of a citizen’s attempts under FOI legislation to obtain information on the Gillard Gouge.

Morton’s story is reproduced below in italics. After each of those paragraphs there is a Bunyip’s notion of how the facts might have been presented by a journalist in control of his advocacy.

Notice in particular two things:

(1) How Morton begins his report by noting that the IPA is “right wing”, thus telegraphing the contempt in which Phage readers should hold Tim Wilson, who has been filing those FOI requests.(2) Far more unsettling is Morton’s refusal to ask why such simple requests require so much time and departmental manpower. One gathers that, in Morton’s view, the public’s right to know is contingent on the convenience of bureaucrats and the need to preserve a government he just happens to support.

MORTON'S VERSION:RIGHT-WING think tank the Institute of Public Affairs has received a warning from the Department of Climate Change after it submitted more than 750 freedom-of-information requests in four months.STRAIGHT VERSION:The Department of Climate Change has threatened to ignore further correspondence from a think tank that has submitted 750 freedom-of-information requests for documents relating to the Gillard Government’s carbon tax.

The institute, which strongly opposes carbon pricing, has made more than 95 per cent of FOI requests lodged with the department since April.The Institute of Public Affairs has been a leader of the anti-tax movement which polls show now enjoys the support of a majority of Australian voters. The IPA has made more than 95 per cent of FOI requests lodged with the department since April.

The department last week wrote to the institute's director of climate change policy, Tim Wilson, and asked that he stop submitting requests so it could deal with the backlog.While public servants are obliged by law to respond in a timely fashion to FOI requests, the department last week wrote to the institute's director of climate change policy, Tim Wilson, and asked that he stop submitting requests so it could deal with the backlog.

If the volume of applications continued the department would consider whether dealing with Mr Wilson's requests was an unreasonable diversion of resources - a step that could lead to him being considered a vexatious applicant.The department further threatened to declare Mr Wilson “a vexatious applicant” if he persists in requesting documents. Mr Wilson could appeal such a decision – a move that would draw further attention to the spin and secrecy critics charge has characterised the Gillard government’s plans to promote and implement the tax. In fighting such an appeal, the department would be likely to claim that dealing with Mr Wilson's requests was an unreasonable diversion of resources. This is a tactic familiar to Canberra observers and reporters, whose requests are often stalled by departmental excuses of inadequate manpower.It is believed Mr Wilson submitted about 440 information requests on one day in late July and more than 140 on one day last week.A government source said it took about 39 hours of staff time to process each application.It is believed Mr Wilson submitted about 440 information requests on one day in late July and more than 140 on one day last week.While government sources are saying it takes about 39 hours of staff time to answer each request, they also are declining to explain why so much time and effort is required.

"He is conducting a political campaign against the government's policy on climate change and this is coming at significant cost to taxpayers,'' the source said.The government source insisted Wilson’s requests were unworthy of prompt response because “he is conducting a political campaign against the government’s policy.” However, FOI laws make no distinction about an applicant’s motives, assuming that all citizens have an equal right to access information, regardless of whether or not it might reflect badly on the government of the moment.

Mr Wilson said he had agreed to stop lodging applications while his requests were processed.Mr Wilson has agreed to withhold further requests until the backlog is cleared. He said he could see no reason why the department found the FOI process so time-consuming, adding that it struck him as further evidence of a government determined to enact the tax in the face of the PM’s pre-election promise not to do so.

After all that, Morton finally let's Wilson have his say, so the following paragraphs need need no tinkering.

He said he was chasing information on a policy that was probably the ''most significant negative transformation of the Australian economy in its history''.

''I have put in a lot of requests and I don't dispute that. People need to know the truth about the carbon tax,'' he said. ''I'm sorry the government doesn't like scrutiny, but it needs to be honest with the Australian people.''

1 comment:

I was directed here and, though I usually ignore attacks on the web, I found this one pretty amusing and thought it worth a reply.

What I actually thought before writing this was: this is an interesting minor story with two points of view worth reporting that could be a talking point.

I'd suggest the evidence backs me up. I'm glad the Oz picked it up - journos tend to like it when their stories are followed elsewhere.

I called the IPA right-wing because it is right aligned. It's a description, not a judgment. Similarly, I've described the Australia Institute as left-wing.

Both are free to submit as many FoIs as they choose. Others can judge whether writing/processing more than 750 FoIs is a good use of the time of anyone involved or whether the department's response is justified.

If you have concerns about my motivation in future feel free to check - amorton@theage.com.au